Thanks for verifying.
On Aug 26, 2011, at 7:09 , Heath Borders wrote:
> You must call remove as many times as you call add. Otherwise,
> subclasses and superclasses would interfere with each other's
> observations.
>
> -Heath Borders
> heath.bord...@gmail.com
> Twitter: heathborders
> http://he
Thanks for verifying!
On Aug 26, 2011, at 11:42 , Sean McBride wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:09:19 -0500, Heath Borders said:
>
>> You must call remove as many times as you call add. Otherwise,
>> subclasses and superclasses would interfere with each other's
>> observations.
>
> Also, see th
On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 09:09:19 -0500, Heath Borders said:
>You must call remove as many times as you call add. Otherwise,
>subclasses and superclasses would interfere with each other's
>observations.
Also, see the 10.7 Foundation Release Notes "More Precise Removal of Key-Value
Observers".
--
__
You must call remove as many times as you call add. Otherwise,
subclasses and superclasses would interfere with each other's
observations.
-Heath Borders
heath.bord...@gmail.com
Twitter: heathborders
http://heath-tech.blogspot.com
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Rick Mann wrote:
> Is -addObs
Is -addObserver:forKeyPath:… idempotent? I called it multiple times with the
same parameters, but called -removeObserver:forKeyPath: only once, and the
object continued to receive KVO notifications.
After adding code to ensure -addObserver:forKeyPath:… was only called once,
-removeObserver:forK
